A Response

[zrs6v4]

You are not coming across badly. I understand your frustration, but honestly you and I don't seem to be in disagreement with most of your explanations. Most of the time you seem to argue for the less deterministic view of God's foreknowing and permitting evil rather than his determination of it. I'm simply asking for your definition of determination so as to find some distinction between our views because as of now we appear to be on the same side of this argument.

I meant I hope I didn't come across sarcastically or arrogant. The forums do that sometimes. Yes God is the one who determines. It is either Him who determines His will in good and evil or it is mankind. You argue that God is secondary in His will and I argue that He is primary.

I asked you about where the thought of Dahmer's heinous sin originated for a very specific reason. If God didn't FIRST think of this act then SOMETHING is "out of his control." That is not to say that he couldn't stop it, we both affirm he could have stopped anything. Instead, it is something that was created by someone other than God and thus not controlled by God. He has the power to stop it, but that is different from being in control of it. See the distinction I'm drawing?

It sounds like an issue for God's goodness and purity. I surely don't want to twist His goodness in my view. I also do not want to take away God's will. If we put man as the primary cause agent then God no longer can do as He desires because His will must not only be established around evil, but also must be established around man's choices. My argument is that God is the primary cause of the good and secondary cause of evil. God still determines all that happens in good and evil before it happens while remaining good in the highest degree.

I believe that God has created beings with the ability of "first cause" choices.

Then how does God do anything He wants to do? I don't argue against free will as you know (being from the Calvinistic perspective). Here is a problem for you: If you put man in the "first cause" seat then now God cannot accomplish His will. In fact God's will becomes man's will. I don't want to force a view on you here, because I hate when others do that to me, so please explain how this works. In my view evil is the only possible place where God is secondary cause.

Now, we all acknowledge that God is able to make a first cause choice, meaning He, the choosing agent, is the first cause in the line of all resulting outcomes...(i.e. God chose to create the earth...no one asks, "What or who caused God to choose to create, because we just accept that He is the cause of his own choices, period...mystery accepted and we move on.) But in the case of a created being the question is this: Is God powerful enough to create a being with the ability to make first cause choices...(choices caused/determined only by the one making the choice and not by some other outside force or predetermined trait)? I believe God is powerful enough to do just that, don't you?

I agree with what you say here. Of course God can do what He wants, but the issue is how does He reveal Himself and what does He actually do? I will refer to a previous question. How can God make primary choices in those whom He uses (Romans 9) and what they do and also give them the primary choice in what they do? In other words, in eternity past if God wanted to use King David to be the King, from the line of Judah, a Christ type, and lover of God's heart, then how can God do that while putting Himself at Davids mercy by being only the secondary cause agent? You must at least see God's good work as primary cause in my mind.

If God, like an author who writes a novel, thought of the character named Jeffery Dahmer and thought up those horrific deeds and then created him so that he had to simply do that which was determined for him to do then obviously you have some issues of divine culpability to deal with...

I discussed this a few posts ago. In eternity past God knew about him, we both agree. God determined that He would allow Dahmer to do as he did. God was not the primary cause by way of temptation. God could have stopped him, but didn't because God's decree was for Dahmer to do just that although God hates that. We agree on most if not all up to this point. God allowed every little situation each second of Dahmer's life to happen to bring him to the point of what he did. God could have sent him a loving family or whatever it was he needed. God could have allowed a demon to drive him to insanity or whatever you might imagine. God even gave Dahmer the personality type, and physical makeup, and so forth (not sin). Could God not have orchestrated Dahmer's life by way of second cause to bring about His will? Do you think God is powerful enough to do that? Now why would God allow Dahmer to do something He hates? Why not stop Dahmer, Satan, and all evil immediately? Those are different questions. Maybe God did decide in eternity past what He was going to allow Dahmer to do (The view of determination your using against my argument)? would that make God evil in your mind?

If however, God created Jeffery Dahmer as a free moral creature who can make first cause choices then God isn't the one who first came up with the sins (he may have foreseen them and let them happen, but they didn't originate with God). Some may think that makes God less "sovereign" but I disagree...it really is all perspective. Make sense?

Yes, I think I am beginning to understand your view, although I disagree with many aspects. If you do anything I asked above, answer my question in defining providence and sovereignty. Also explain how God can allow man be the primary cause agent in both good and evil and still accomplish His will. If you don't know what Im asking, just read my above responses and you should get the idea.

Obviously in creation God knew He was going to allow a lot of evil to happen. Including the entrance of sin, murder, rape, and all of those terrible things. God knew which of those He wanted (not desired) to enter in and on this we agree. Did God think up each of those situations and knew He wanted them to happen, that is tough to understand. We must keep in mind that God is in control of every second and every breath. By in control, I don't mean primary cause on everything such as evil thoughts or deeds. God is the one who controlled the arrow to perfectly pierce Ahab by a random fling. He surely can be sovereign over evil, ultimately being the one people can blame for everything if they want. "A lot is cast into the lap, but every decision is from the Lord."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

wait....

are you saying a Rodeo is a game?

That shows you what I know. Me is a city boy

There is a city in W. Va? Where?

 

[mets65]

There is a city in W. Va? Where?

There are none, don't even try to find one.

 

[Skandelon]

If we put man as the primary cause agent then God no longer can do as He desires because His will must not only be established around evil, but also must be established around man's choices.

Scripture does seem to at least give the impression that God does in fact respond to and react to man's choices. Here is just one of many passage that give that very distinct impression:

Gen 6:5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth--men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air--for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

And there are many passages where Moses prayed for the Israelites and the scripture APPEARS to teach that God responds. Now, I'm familiar with the anthropomorphic arguments used to explain away the implications of these texts, but such a theological response is not given in the text which brings up this question: "If it is okay for scripture to give the impression that God is reacting to and 'contending with' man and his decisions, then why is it wrong for those reading it to walk away believing that?"

In other words, should our theological theories explain away clear biblical implications and meanings? I assure you that Moses nor the Israelites weren't comforting each other with the anthropomorphic theological theories, instead they were begging God to change his mind and have mercy on them.

My argument is that God is the primary cause of the good and secondary cause of evil. God still determines all that happens in good and evil before it happens while remaining good in the highest degree.

Can you expound on this and show how that is possible? The original thought of molesting a child originated where? That heinous thought had to start somewhere and if you don't allow for God's creatures to have first cause ability then you have a God who came up with this sin. How can he remain good in the highest degree? How is this consistent with scripture where it teaches God doesn't even tempt men to evil to now say God determined all evil?

Then how does God do anything He wants to do?

What do you mean? You don't think God is powerful enough to still accomplish His desires in a world where men are free to follow their own desires?

If God created men with the ability to make first cause choices, don't you think he would make necessary provisions to see that His ultimate purposes are accomplished despite those free choices? Or is that just too difficult for God?

I don't argue against free will as you know (being from the Calvinistic perspective)

I understand, but there is a very distinct difference in most Calvinists view of free will. Most Calvinists limit free will to man's ability to do what he wants. There are two problems with that view.

1) It doesn't draw a distinction between a free choice and the instinctive choices of animals, after all they are both choices according to what one desires.

2) What point is there in pointing to the desire of man as being a determining factor when the desires themselves have been determined by God? It doesn't remove the issue of divine culpability, it just backs it up a step in effort to make its adherents feel a little better about a God who is determining men like Dahmer to think of and act upon such heinous sin.

Here is a problem for you: If you put man in the "first cause" seat then now God cannot accomplish His will. In fact God's will becomes man's will. I don't want to force a view on you here, because I hate when others do that to me, so please explain how this works. In my view evil is the only possible place where God is secondary cause.

It is only a problem if you put God on the same playing field as man, which is clearly not the case. He is still omniscient, omnipotent and sovereign over all things. Turn your question around, "How could God, with all his ability, not accomplish His will even in a world where men have the ability to make first cause choices?

Don't you think God's first cause choices (his purposes) could be accomplished despite man's choices? Remember I affirm God ability to foresee and prevent any act of man, so I don't see the problem here.

I discussed this a few posts ago. In eternity past God knew about him, we both agree. God determined that He would allow Dahmer to do as he did. God was not the primary cause by way of temptation. God could have stopped him, but didn't because God's decree was for Dahmer to do just that although God hates that.

Do you see why I'm confused by your answers? In your view God didn't merely "determine to allow Dahmer to do as he did," in your view "God determines all that happens in good and evil," remember? That would include the very thought or temptation Dahmer first had which set in motion his heinous crimes. Again this goes back to where the thought originated...I don't think you have really answered that question.

Could God not have orchestrated Dahmer's life by way of second cause to bring about His will? Do you think God is powerful enough to do that?

Sure I do, why wouldn't I?

Now why would God allow Dahmer to do something He hates? Why not stop Dahmer, Satan, and all evil immediately?

That is a question for both of us to answer because we both affirm God could have intervened to stop Dahmer, but my view only has God allowing evil while your view still seems to have God originating sin.

Yes, I think I am beginning to understand your view, although I disagree with many aspects. If you do anything I asked above, answer my question in defining providence and sovereignty. Also explain how God can allow man be the primary cause agent in both good and evil and still accomplish His will. If you don't know what Im asking, just read my above responses and you should get the idea.

Obviously in creation God knew He was going to allow a lot of evil to happen.

True, but that is a far cry from his originating the evil, which is the issue at hand.

By in control, I don't mean primary cause on everything such as evil thoughts or deeds.

Explain how this works in a system where God has decreed whatsoever comes to pass? In other words, how is God more or less in control over one cause than another? What makes a cause "secondary" when the one who has determined all things is just in control of the first cause as he is the secondary ones?